In This Game of Chicken, We All Lose

Report offers challenging yet pragmatic approach to fixing our nation’s financial woes.

August 07, 2011
KEYWORDS crisis , debt , political
/ PRINT / ShareShare / Text Size +

Painful action required

While members of the commission who wrote “Choosing the Nation’s Fiscal Future” disagree on many policy matters, the report states, “We are unanimous that forceful, even painful, action must be taken soon to alter the nation’s fiscal course.”

Not to do so risks a fiscal crisis that could throw the country back into recession, spark an interest-rate increase that will heighten what businesses and consumers pay for credit, and risk a downgrade in the nation’s credit rating. Sounds much like the crisis created around raising the debt ceiling.

“Choosing the Nation’s Fiscal Future” proposes a decade-long time frame that uses as its primary metric the size of the government’s debt as a percentage of the nation’s gross domestic product (GDP).

The debt, which was about 40% of GDP just a few years ago, is now close to 100% following the recession and stimulus—the highest rate since the end of WWII.

The project’s committee proposes 60% GDP as an initial goal, believing that target is achievable over the next decade or so. But it will require spending restraints, including cuts to entitlement programs and revenue increases.

The latter is the primary stumbling block responsible for our current political gridlock—particularly as Tea Party Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives refuse to consider any additional revenue, including the elimination or reform of tax expenditures or loopholes.

Progressives, on the other hand, will have to accept that a lower ratio means spending restraints and reform they would have found unacceptable only a few years ago.

The committee believes 60% is an appropriate balance between the risks associated with the current high ratio and the difficulty in implementing policies consistent with a lower ratio. It lays out different potential revenue and spending scenarios that our policymakers could choose among to hit that goal.

Beyond the next decade, the committee recommends additional reductions in the ratio to give the nation flexibility to handle any major crisis that could come along.

On the bright side, if our lawmakers find common ground and embrace the need for spending restraints and revenue enhancement, then the distasteful battle over raising the debt ceiling in 2011 may prove to have been a good thing for the nation.

If common ground isn’t discovered, then as a nation we may want to respond as white-tail deer do to a threat—turn and run for the hills.

I purchased “Choosing the Nation’s Financial Future” when it was published in 2010, but the entire report is available here at no cost.

You can download the report in its entirety or by specific chapters. The website is worth visiting as it has become a forum for moderated debate and an aggregator of relevant information on the nation’s fiscal crisis from a wide array of sources.

MARK CONDON is CUNA’s senior vice president, business and consumer publishing. Contact him at 608-231-4078.

Post a comment to this story


What's Popular

Popular Stories

Recent Discussion

Great article! Unfortunately, most employees don’t feel valued or appreciated by their supervisors or employers. In fact, research has shown that the predominant reason team members quit their jobs is because they don’t feel valued. This is in spite of the fact that employee recognition programs have proliferated in the workplace – over 90% of all organizations in the U.S. has some form of employee recognition activities in place. But most employee recognition programs are viewed with skepticism and cynicism – because they aren’t viewed as being genuine in their communication of appreciation. Getting the “employee of the month” award, receiving a certificate of recognition, or a “Way to go, team!” email just don’t get the job done. How do you communicate authentic appreciation? We have found people have different ways that they want to be shown appreciation, and if you don’t communicate in the language of appreciation important to them, you essentially “miss the mark”. Additionally, employees need to receive recognition more than once a year at their performance review. Otherwise, they view the praise as “going through the motions”. A third component of authentic appreciation is that the communication has to be about them personally – not the department, not their group, but something they did. Finally, they have to believe that you mean what you say. How you treat them has to match the words you use. If you are not sure how your team members want to be shown appreciation, the Motivating By Appreciation Inventory ( will identify the language of appreciation and specific actions preferred by each employee. You then can create a group profile for your team, so everyone knows how to encourage one another. Remember, employees want to know that they are valued for what they contribute to the success of the organization. And communicating authentic appreciation in the ways they desire it can make the difference between keeping your quality team members or having a negative work environment that everyone wants to leave. Paul White, Ph.D., is the co-author of The 5 Languages of Appreciation in the Workplace with Dr. Gary Chapman.

Your Say: Who should be Credit Union Magazine's 2014 CU Hero of the Year?

View Results Poll Archive